Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

8000 ft limit?



12,156' is my max. Flew above 9,000' most of that week. :)

Thats an awesome place to do 4x4.

I am planning a trip for next year on some old military roads from WW1 & 2 in the French alps with a classic range rover.
Not as high as Tin Cup and less difficult, don't want to stress the rangie to much

Cheers,
Rob
 
Acronym for "Vortex Ring State". A disturbed air/aircraft instability phenomenon that occurs with helicopters than hover in one place too long, often mistakenly attributed to multirotors during an unstable, vertical decent. Since multirotors utilize a minimum of two sets of opposing rotation rotors it's highly improbable the effect can be achieved with a multirotor.

Personally, after several years of flying many different kinds of multirotors, large, small, heavy, light, fast and slow, coaxial and standard, I have yet to see a multirotor experience stability problems that were not caused by an operator trying to hover too close to the ground, pull power back to a level that caused free fall, or improperly set up PID's. Regarding pulling back power, bear in mind that many DIY, 3DR, Vector, or earlier systems utilized a throttle stick where pulling full down throttle reduced power to zero, so it was possible to reduce prop speed to ground idle during flight.

Some like to blame "VRS" when they crash their aircraft during a descent. Some want to claim VRS when hovering close to the ground if the aircraft wobbles, failing to consider the air between the aircraft and the ground is being roiled by the prop wash, creating turbulence, while also disregarding what is known as "ground effect" when the aircraft is within a couple of propeller diameters from the ground. Some of them claim it is unsafe to vertically descend a multirotor from altitude. I am most certainly not one of them.

At 10,000' and up I'm pretty sure an H will have reached what is known as "critical altitude", where any reduction in airspeed or increase in angle of attack will induce an aerodynamic stall. The atmosphere becomes "less dense" with increase in altitude, with altitude density having profound effects on airfoil efficiency, something the propellers are. Essentially they need to spin a lot faster than what the motors can do to provide the thrust needed to keep the H in the air.
 
Last edited:
Acronym for "Vortex Ring State". A disturbed air/aircraft instability phenomenon that occurs with helicopters than hover in one place too long, often mistakenly attributed to multirotors during an unstable, vertical decent. Since multirotors utilize a minimum of two sets of opposing rotation rotors it's highly improbable the effect can be achieved with a multirotor.

Personally, after several years of flying many different kinds of multirotors, large, small, heavy, light, fast and slow, coaxial and standard, I have yet to see a multirotor experience stability problems that were not caused by an operator trying to hover too close to the ground, pull power back to a level that caused free fall, or improperly set up PID's. Regarding pulling back power, bear in mind that many DIY, 3DR, Vector, or earlier systems utilized a throttle stick where pulling full down throttle reduced power to zero, so it was possible to reduce prop speed to ground idle during flight.

Some like to blame "VRS" when they crash their aircraft during a descent. Some want to claim VRS when hovering close to the ground if the aircraft wobbles, failing to consider the air between the aircraft and the ground is being roiled by the prop wash, creating turbulence, while also disregarding what is known as "ground effect" when the aircraft is within a couple of propeller diameters from the ground. Some of them claim it is unsafe to vertically descend a multirotor from altitude. I am most certainly not one of them.

At 10,000' and up I'm pretty sure an H will have reached what is known as "critical altitude", where any reduction in airspeed or increase in angle of attack will induce an aerodynamic stall. The atmosphere becomes "less dense" with increase in altitude, with altitude density having profound effects on airfoil efficiency, something the propellers are. Essentially they need to spin a lot faster than what the motors can do to provide the thrust needed to keep the H in the air.
Thanks, Pat. I will not worry about VRS with the TH.
 
Acronym for "Vortex Ring State". A disturbed air/aircraft instability phenomenon that occurs with helicopters than hover in one place too long, often mistakenly attributed to multirotors during an unstable, vertical decent. Since multirotors utilize a minimum of two sets of opposing rotation rotors it's highly improbable the effect can be achieved with a multirotor.

Personally, after several years of flying many different kinds of multirotors, large, small, heavy, light, fast and slow, coaxial and standard, I have yet to see a multirotor experience stability problems that were not caused by an operator trying to hover too close to the ground, pull power back to a level that caused free fall, or improperly set up PID's. Regarding pulling back power, bear in mind that many DIY, 3DR, Vector, or earlier systems utilized a throttle stick where pulling full down throttle reduced power to zero, so it was possible to reduce prop speed to ground idle during flight.

Some like to blame "VRS" when they crash their aircraft during a descent. Some want to claim VRS when hovering close to the ground if the aircraft wobbles, failing to consider the air between the aircraft and the ground is being roiled by the prop wash, creating turbulence, while also disregarding what is known as "ground effect" when the aircraft is within a couple of propeller diameters from the ground. Some of them claim it is unsafe to vertically descend a multirotor from altitude. I am most certainly not one of them.

At 10,000' and up I'm pretty sure an H will have reached what is known as "critical altitude", where any reduction in airspeed or increase in angle of attack will induce an aerodynamic stall. The atmosphere becomes "less dense" with increase in altitude, with altitude density having profound effects on airfoil efficiency, something the propellers are. Essentially they need to spin a lot faster than what the motors can do to provide the thrust needed to keep the H in the air.
I personally, and respectfully, disagree with PatR. It is my view that VRS can occur with multirotors if the right (or wrong depending on how you look at it) conditions prevail.

When an aircraft is hovering, it induces a flow of air through the rotor discs in the same way as a propeller does in a fixed wing aircraft. The inner sections of the rotor blades have a greater angle of attack to even out lift across the blades. If the aircraft descends, then, the external airflow will oppose the induced flow generated by the rotors. The blade roots will have their relative airflow adjusted by this external flow caused by the descent, giving an effective increase in the angle of attack.

At the blade tips, the vortices recirculate and intensify, aided by the external airflow. This causes an effective decrease in the blade angle of attack, and therefore lift. If the process continues, the blade will stall at its root as it reaches its critical angle of attack, and the blade tips will be producing less lift due to the recirculating vortices. It is at this point that it can be said that the aircraft has entered VRS. Note that the vortices do not form in a symmetrical fashion so the aircraft may move in all three axes in an unpredictable manner.
Reference: Rheinmetall Remote Pilots Course (Theory) Aide-Memoire (RTP UK) Page 31.

I agree with PatR that multirotors are less likely to be effected by VRS given that we have opposing rotation rotors, but certainly not impossible given the right conditions.

With respect to you PatR.
 
Last edited:
I personally, and respectfully, disagree with PatR. It is my view that VRS can occur with multirotors if the right (or wrong depending on how you look at it) conditions prevail.

When an aircraft is hovering, it induces a flow of air through the rotor discs in the same way as a propeller does in a fixed wing aircraft. The inner sections of the rotor blades have a greater angle of attack to even out lift across the blades. If the aircraft descends, then, the external airflow will oppose the induced flow generated by the rotors. The blade roots will have their relative airflow adjusted by this external flow caused by the descent, giving an effective increase in the angle of attack.

At the blade tips, the vortices recirculate and intensify, aided by the external airflow. This causes an effective decrease in the blade angle of attack, and therefore lift. If the process continues, the blade will stall at its root as it reaches its critical angle of attack, and the blade tips will be producing less lift due to the recirculating vortices. It is at this point that it can be said that the aircraft has entered VRS. Note that the vortices do not form in a symmetrical fashion so the aircraft may move in all three axes in an unpredictable manner.
Reference: Rheinmetall Remote Pilots Course (Theory) Aide-Memouire (RTP UK) Page 31.

I agree with PatR that multirotors are less likely to be effected by VRS given that we have opposing rotation rotors, but certainly not impossible given the right conditions.

With respect to you PatR.

Wow, that's a quite a bit to digest! I would like to see some diagrams illustrating the effect. The book referenced doesn't appear online anywhere that I could find.

In the mean time, it sounds like descending rapidly through the prop wash (straight down if no wind) could be dangerous. No problem, I usually come down at an angle or in a spiral anyway.
 
<snip>... The book referenced doesn't appear online anywhere that I could find.

In the mean time, it sounds like descending rapidly through the prop wash (straight down if no wind) could be dangerous. No problem, I usually come down at an angle or in a spiral anyway.
The book which I referenced is given out in the classroom to prospective remote pilots studying for their Remote Pilot's Certificate via RUSTA in the U.K. It is an 'Aide Memoire' to be studied by the students prior to taking the exam so will not be available via the internet. It is a classroom book.

As PatR rightly pointed out, VRS is less likely to occur in multirotors than with single rotor aircraft and with the later models of multirotors that have their decent speeds limited via firmware the instances of VRS occurring is further reduced...but not eliminated given the right conditions. We were taught in the classroom that descending using some lateral movement (at an angle) on still days is good practice to further reduce the likelihood of VRS and, in my flight evaluation (something that we British have to do to get the Remote Pilot's Certificate), I demonstrated the practice to the praise of the flight evaluator.

On older multirotors VRS was slightly more common to see than it is now since they tended to use less sophisticated firmware and sometimes didn't have their descent speed limited enough to avoid it. Indeed, dji released a firmware update in 2015 for the Phantom 2 Vision range that did limit it's descent speed further to help reduce the likelihood of going into VRS. I have a Phantom 2 Vision Plus, a fairly old version (relatively speaking) of the Phantom range as well as my H, so I am well used to taking things a little more sedately on descent than those with more modern aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Pat and FV, thanks for taking the time to explain VRS. I have no plans to fly commercially or get the US FAA Part 107 license but, even so, it's good to understand the aerodynamics of these birds.
I'm planning a flight this afternoon at a location in Washington State with hundreds of mysterious earth mounds. Hopefully, the wild flowers will be in bloom. It's been a few weeks since I've flown so I'd better wait the 15 minutes for GPS almanac update.
 
I left the S.WA, N.OR vicinity just a few weeks ago. Everything should be in full bloom right now, and with a little luck not raining where you're going.

The only time I ever encountered what some might call VRS was when flying a 3DR x8 that used low throttle position as motor idle, center throttle as hover, and everything above center as climb or speed. Showing off one sun setting evening over a cherry orchard with all the pretty lights flashing, drawing oohs and ahhs from the orchard owners I put the X8 into a very aggressive climb (it's quite fast in climb and cruise) and chopped the throttle at an altitude of about 500'. For those about to complain about the altitude the orchard owner owned the airfield adjacent to the orchard. So chopping power and the x8 dropped like a 6lb brick, flipping to the inverted after a couple tumbles. Full power righted it and from there a vertical descent was executed to landing.

Bottom line, the motors were not, and could not, generate enough thrust to maintain flight stability. Had it been fitted with wings it could have become a glider but their are no glide characteristics with a power off multirotor. If a motor is not provided with enough current to keep the boom up it's gonna drop.

Now ya dunnit Flush,:) ya got me thinking about that x8 and Pixhawk and the Go Pro that's on it. Time to pull the Go Pro and fit one of the numerous turret cameras on the market right now and turn it into a work horse. That thing will do anything I want it to.
 
Last edited:
...<snip>...

Now ya dunnit Flush,:) ya got me thinking about that x8 and Pixhawk and the Go Pro that's on it. Time to pull the Go Pro and fit one of the numerous turret cameras on the market right now and turn it into a work horse. That thing will do anything I want it to.
Happy to oblige.

The best multirotor I've ever owned (apart from the H of course;)) was a Phantom 2 vision. A relatively simple aircraft by today's standards which boasted a single axis gimbal that made video VERY unstable, and I often had to digitally stabilize the footage to make it watchable. But I trusted it. I could throw it around to my heart's content and it was always up for more. Indeed, after aggressive flying I could still count on 20 minutes in the air off one battery. Sadly, when I got my PfCO I retired it because I needed video footage of at least reasonable quality to have a hope of being paid to produce it and the P2Vs unsteady footage wasn't up to commercial quality. I still have that aircraft sitting on a shelf and I know the batteries are still good because I use them with a P2V+ that I still regularly fly. I might bring it out of retirement simply for the fun side of things.
 
Wow. You guys are a font of great info, and I for one appreciate you sharing it here.:cool:
Personally I do not like acronyms in general conversation, but now I know what VRS means in aircraft discussions.

Google thinks VRS means Virginia Retirement System:eek:. Funny...:D
 
Wow. You guys are a font of great info, and I for one appreciate you sharing it here.:cool:
Personally I do not like acronyms in general conversation, but now I know what VRS means in aircraft discussions.

Google thinks VRS means Virginia Retirement System:eek:. Funny...:D
LOL.
Another name term that means the same as Vortex Ring State (VRS) is Settlement With Power (SWP) so that's another acronym for you to chew on :D
 
I did a search on the service ceiling of the H after several flights today at roughly 11,000 - 11,400 and found this thread.

Aside from a slower accent rate I had no issues at this elevation. I now want to bump my altitude limit, hug the side of mountain within 400 ft. and peak over the ridge at about 12,000 - 12,500'. The vista of western colorado from this particular vantage point would be priceless, since this portion of the pass was closed many years ago.

Has anyone flown to 12,500?
 
Last edited:
I did a search on the service ceiling of the H after several flights today at roughly 11,000 - 11,400 and found this thread.

Aside from a slower accent rate I had no issues at this elevation. I now want to bump my altitude limit, hug the side of mountain within 400 ft. and peak over the ridge at about 12,000 - 12,500'. The vista of western colorado from this particular vantage point would be priceless, since this portion of the pass was closed many years ago.

Has anyone flown to 12,500?
The Highest point in the U.K. is Ben Nevis (Scotland) standing at 1344 metres (4409 ft.), and Scafell Pike is the highest mountain in England at 912 metres. So, unless I travel overseas there's no chance of flying any of my aircraft to a height that they can't manage.
 
Being a "senior" I find having CRS my biggest problem...

Close to old farthood here, but I can definitivly say that I have had CRS since I was ohhh, mebbe 28... :confused:
 
Hi guys,

I'm in the Alps on holiday and yesterday, while creating a CCC, I got a message on the ST16 about a height limit.
I took off at 2500+ meters and all was fine. The message appeared after I created the second way point.
I then stopped with the CCC, tapped the delete button and flew around a bit (higher than the way points) without issues or warnings.
On the forum I have seen messages about people flying the H way above 8000 ft in the mountains but they are non European customers.
Does this limit only apply in CCC or for the bird in general in Europe?
I wrote yuneec but it can take up to 5 days for them to answer and I'm going up a glacier tomorrow.

Thanks,
Rob


Hi guys,

Today I got a reply from yuneec cs, due to email issues it's 3 months late and they are asking me for a screenshot because they are not aware of the problem I had.

Problem was trying to create a CCC above 8000' when I was in the Alps.
Regular flying above 8000' went without issues.

2 questions if you don't mind:
Anyone tried to create a CCC above 8000'?

Do screen messages show up in the telemetry and use that to send to yuneec cs?

Thanks,
Rob
 
Hi guys,

Today I got a reply from yuneec cs, due to email issues it's 3 months late and they are asking me for a screenshot because they are not aware of the problem I had.

Problem was trying to create a CCC above 8000' when I was in the Alps.
Regular flying above 8000' went without issues.

2 questions if you don't mind:
Anyone tried to create a CCC above 8000'?

Do screen messages show up in the telemetry and use that to send to yuneec cs?

Thanks,
Rob
Rob,

FWIW, please see my post #36 above. I'll be returning to this site at a base elevation of 11,000 and will try a CCC mission and report back. By chance do you have an answer to my question of flying to 12,500?

Thanks
Brad
 

New Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
20,977
Messages
241,829
Members
27,383
Latest member
wiebeedigital